Reach New Heights with ISPI

Amplified Leadership

Tue, 18 Aug 2026 08:00:06 -0700

by Rachel Walter, CPTD

One of the central ideas in Amplified Leadership has become even more important as organizations race to adopt AI: technology is an amplifier, not a substitute for leadership or sound performance systems. Giving people access to AI does not, by itself, create better performance. If we add AI to an inefficient workflow, an unnecessary approval process, a poorly designed role, or a decision no one has clearly defined, we may simply accelerate the dysfunction.

AI adoption should force us back to the work itself. What outcome are we trying to produce? Which tasks still create value? Which can be eliminated, automated, augmented, or fundamentally redesigned? Where is human judgment essential? What decisions can now happen differently? And what capabilities do people and leaders need in the redesigned system? The performance gap is rarely solved by placing a new tool on top of yesterday’s process. We must reconsider the process, workflow, roles, measures, and expectations surrounding it.

This is also where leadership becomes critical. In Amplified Leadership, I argue that technology and AI should multiply human capability rather than simply increase activity. Leaders create the conditions in which people can question established ways of working, experiment with new ones, and determine whether technology is (measurably) improving the outcome. The measure of successful AI adoption is not how many people use AI, how many prompts they write, or even how much time they save. From a performance improvement perspective, the question is: What can the...Read More

What is Performance Improvement?

Tue, 09 Jun 2026 07:00:59 -0700

Years ago, I was an instructional designer. Someone would hand me a request. Build a course on this. Design a workshop on that. And before I started, I'd ask myself a question that was never on the order form: is training even going to fix this?

Sometimes the answer was yes. Often it wasn't. The real problem was a process that didn't work, expectations no one had made clear, people getting no feedback, or a tool that fought them all day. I could build a beautiful course and change nothing, because the course was never the problem.

I didn't have a name for what I was doing when I asked that question. Now I know that the name is performance improvement. And if you've ever stopped to ask whether the solution you were handed would actually fix the problem, you're already doing this work too.

The Foundation Under the Work

People hear "performance improvement" and assume it's a separate job, a title on an org chart somewhere. It isn't. It's the foundation underneath a lot of jobs.

An instructional designer stands on it. So does an OD consultant, an L&D manager, a talent leader, a faculty member, an analyst, and someone in a role that says "performance" right on the door. We don't share a title. We share a discipline. It's the ground that makes the work actually work, no matter what we build on top of it.

That's why the field can feel hard to pin down. We're not defined by what we produce. We're defined by how we think about the problem before we produce anything.

Are You Already Practicing Performance Improvement

Peformance Improvement is a way of working that shows up in four habits.

You don't assume the answer. You diagnose before you prescribe, the way a good doctor does. You'd never trust a physician who wrote a prescription before asking where it hurts, and you hold your own work to the same...Read More

Focus on Results...REALLY!

Mon, 01 Jun 2026 07:00:01 -0700

By Dr. Carl Binder

In ISPI’s efforts to define itself and connect with colleagues, “results” has always been central to our message. Yet there is a puzzling disconnect: I have seldom seen articles in our journals that report measurable results from projects or interventions.

Years ago, Timm Esque and I spent two years trying to identify ISPI colleagues willing and able to share data from projects demonstrating improved performance for conference presentations. Our goal was to make a poster session featuring documented results a regular part of ISPI conferences. After two years, however, we abandoned the effort because it proved extraordinarily difficult to find colleagues who could share such data.

To be candid, this experience undermined my confidence in ISPI’s claims about results. It also led me to review past issues of Performance Improvement Quarterly and Performance Improvement Journal to look for published reports of interventions with measurable outcomes. Unfortunately, I found very few.

My own background is in applied behavior science. I was a doctoral student of B.F. Skinner, who often said that his most important contributions were not the many discoveries that emerged from his work, but rather the discovery of his measure—rate of response (count per unit of time)—and the standard graphic display of such data. These methods made possible a highly sensitive form of measurement that could be extended beyond the laboratory to include counts of behavior, accomplishments, and business results (e.g., dollars) per hour, day, week, or year.

In Skinner’s approach to behavior science—which ISPI often cites as one of the foundations of performance improvement through the work of Gilbert, Brethower, Rummler, Tosti, and others—measurement is part of an inductive science. We measure what we do, collect data continuously,...Read More

The Field Needed a Standard. We Built One.

Tue, 26 May 2026 12:43:13 -0700

Everyone is talking about Artificial Intelligence. The conversations happening in boardrooms, at conferences, and across LinkedIn all tend to follow the same pattern. Which tools should we adopt? How do we get our people using AI faster? How do we keep up?

Those are understandable questions. They are also the wrong ones to start with.

If you have been following the ISPI Renaissance Revival series, you already know why. Guy Wallace reminded us that performance improvement is not about fixing people or handing them new tools. It is about designing the whole system so people can succeed. Roger Kaufman spent decades making the case that "need" is a noun, not a verb: it is a gap in results, not a call to action. Judy Hale brought it full circle: HPT is not just systemic in its view. It is systematic in its discipline.

When we apply that same lens to Artificial Intelligence, the question changes. It is no longer "which AI tools should we adopt?" The question becomes: "What gap in performance are we actually trying to close, and is AI the right intervention to close it?"

That is the question AI4PI was built to answer.

What AI4PI Actually Is

A I4PI , Artificial Intelligence for Performance Improvement, is ISPI's flagship professional pathway. It is the first of its kind in the performance improvement field. No other professional organization in our discipline has built an evidence-based, structured framework for applying AI as a performance intervention rather than as a novelty or a shortcut.

And...Read More

ISPI's Renaissance

Mon, 18 May 2026 08:01:17 -0700

by ISPI Past President, Guy W. Wallace

I entered the L&D field back in 1979, right after college, and after two jobs in corporations I joined a small consulting firm of three people in 1982 and was asked to start its Training Practice Area. So, I
started that by defining and refining the process that I would use for conducting performance-based Curriculum Architecture Design (CAD) projects as an external consultant.

In 1983 my associates and I wrote two articles which were published in 1984 on our performance-based Analysis methods and our performance-based Curriculum Architecture Design methods, both using a Facilitated Group Process of Master Performers and Other Subject Matter Experts.

I eventually branded my ISD methods for CAD and for Modular Curriculum Development (MCD) as the PACT Processes for Performance Based Instruction, when we decided to sell a consultative service to help our clients adopt and adapt those ISD processes that had worked so well for us, after receiving many requests.

The CAD process had to be detailed on paper well enough that I could estimate the touch time and cycle times for the Project Plans and Proposals we would provide to prospects, and that would guide the performance of my two fellow consultants and any subcontractors I might engage.

Having been exposed to Performance Technology at NSPI (now ISPI), which would be rechristened Human Performance Technology in the mid-1990s, I wanted my Instructional Systems Design (ISD) methods to be a subset of my eventual PT/HPT methods, branded as EPPI – Enterprise Process Performance Improvement.

My framework for the enablers of Performance eventually became what...Read More

The Case for Revival

Sat, 16 May 2026 04:35:34 -0700

Part of the ISPI Renaissance Revival Series, honoring the masters who built this field.

When disruption hits, every industry falls into a familiar pattern: sprint forward, adopt whatever is newest, rebrand, pivot. The underlying assumption is that the past has nothing useful to offer a world that looks nothing like it used to.

I want to challenge that assumption. Right now, as the performance improvement field is drowning in AI tools, quick-fix frameworks, and solution-first thinking, the most radical thing ISPI can do is go back. Not back out of nostalgia, but because the people who built this field alreadysolved many of the problems that we are facing today.

In our ongoing Training Masters Revival Series, we recently featured a conversation with Guy W. Wallace. Guy is an ISPI legend, a former ISPI President, our 2010 Honorary Life Member, and a practitioner who has spent decades consulting for Fortune 500 companies.

by Dr. Kasi Guillot, ISPI Academic Programs Director

As ISPI continues its Renaissance, a critical focus is academia’s role in performance improvement. ISPI has long welcomed both scholars and practitioners, but now we can intentionally reconnect these communities in meaningful, modern, mutually beneficial ways. The Academic Committee prioritizes connecting academic learning directly with real-world performance practice.

Academic programs provide knowledge, but students often lack a clear path to apply it, show competence, or connect with the professional community. We aim to close this gap.

Pathways for Students

Our primary initiative is to create structured pathways for students from learners to practitioners. We evaluate how academic coursework—applied projects, capstones, and dissertations-in-practice—demonstrates competence aligned with ISPI standards. Rather than viewing certification separately, we aim to integrate it with students' academic progression so they accumulate credentials like the CPT and CAIT.

This approach makes certification more accessible and spotlights the significance of hands-on, performance-based learning in academic programs. It encourages students to focus on showing what they can do, not just finishing assignments—an important mindset for future professionals.

Partnership with Colleges & Universities

At the same time, we are building stronger partnerships with colleges and universities. These go beyond just membership. We want ISPI to be a real academic partner—helping develop programs, making curricula more relevant, and giving students more chances to get involved in the field early on.

We are broadening academic...Read More

Why ISPI's Future Is a Renaissance

Tue, 28 Apr 2026 13:37:54 -0700

by Dr. Lynne MacBain, CAIT, CPT

Renaissance.

Robert Feeney used the word in his keynote in Nashville. Attendees used it unprompted in their feedback. And the more I have sat with it, the more I believe it is not just an accurate description of where ISPI stands right now. It is the right frame for where we are going.

I did not choose the word because it sounds impressive. I chose it because it is honest.

A Renaissance is not an invention. It is a rediscovery. It is what happens when a community looks at what it already possesses and makes the deliberate choice to put it fully to work.

That is where ISPI stands right now.

Why a Renaissance? Why Now?

The energy in Nashville was hard to miss. Nearly 170 practitioners were in the room, with more joining virtually. People were not just sitting in sessions. They were talking in the hallways, staying late, asking questions, and leaning in.

What I felt in Nashville was a profession rediscovering its identity.

We know who we are. We know what we do that no one else does.

The question is whether we are willing to act like it.

The ISPI Renaissance is not a slogan. It is a strategic frame for 2026-2027, built around four forces already shaping our work: Revival, Breakthrough, Exploration, and Patronage.

Revival

The historical Renaissance began with scholars returning to classical texts. Not because the past was better, but because foundational thinking became more relevant, not less, in a rapidly changing world.

ISPI’s Revival is the same kind of move.

Our methodology is not a legacy concept. It is one of the most rigorous frameworks available for evaluating anything new, including AI. Systems thinking, evidence-based practice, and human performance technology are not relics. They are our...Read More

Emotional Intelligence at Work, Amplified Through AI4PI

Thu, 16 Apr 2026 11:56:53 -0700

New instructional designers usually have the technical skills they
need, like building courses, using tools, and applying learning
theories. But most programs don’t prepare them for the hardest part:
working with people. Deadlines might change, stakeholders might
disagree, and team tensions might rise. In those moments, technical
skills alone aren’t enough.

Dr. Sonja Irlbeck and Dr. Suzanne Dunn (2020) explain that
“Workplace emotional intelligence (EI) is becoming increasingly
important to employers… emotionally intelligent workers are able to more
successfully navigate within any organizational structure and culture.”

So how can students learn EI?

Performance Improvement provides a way: use real-life scenarios,
practice working together, give feedback, and track progress. It’s hard
to do this for every learner, and that’s where AI4PI helps.

First, we look at what learners need and if they’re ready. AI can
identify where students struggle through analyzing their reflections,
conversations, or team exercises, such as stress, conflict, or team
effort. Then, AI gives practical simulations. For example, one student
might respond to a “frustrated manager” email, while another works
through a virtual team conflict. AI suggests strategies, promotes
reflection, and tracks progress. Instructors still guide the process,
review feedback, correct mistakes, and make sure everything is fair.

The AI4PI Framework guides the...Read More

The Thinking Machine vs. The Doing Machine

Wed, 08 Apr 2026 19:21:38 -0700

Artificial Intelligence isn’t just reshaping tasks—it’s reshaping how organizations think, act, and perform. Yet in the rush to
“adopt AI,” many leaders are misclassifying the very tools they hope
will transform their organizations. And misclassification has
consequences: wasted investment, poorly designed interventions, and
avoidable risk.

The most strategic distinction leaders must understand is this:

Automation and AI Agents are not the same—and they should never be treated as interchangeable.

This is not a technical nuance. It is a performance issue.

Why This Distinction Matters for Performance Improvement Leaders

Every executive wants faster processes, smarter decision-making, and better
customer outcomes. But choosing the wrong type of AI—or applying the
right type in the wrong way—creates real organizational vulnerability.

Automation accelerates what is already predictable.
AI Agents navigate what is variable, complex, or ambiguous.

Treat an agent like automation, and you stop short of innovation.

Treat automation like an agent, and you introduce risk with no upside.

In a business environment defined by speed and uncertainty, knowing the
difference is no longer optional. It’s a strategic competency.

Automation: The Doing Machine

Automation is deterministic. If X happens, do Y. It is the workhorse of
operational efficiency—stable, standardized, and perfectly suited for
high-volume, low-variance tasks. When the performance problem is
friction or delay, automation is the right intervention.

Example: Automating system access for new hires.

This doesn’t require reasoning—it requires consistency. Automation reduces a
3-week administrative bottleneck to a 1-day turnaround. No judgment. No
...Read More